Americans, Do Not Vote

[Spectrum]

be prepared for homophobia, sexism, and of course racism and religous bigotry

I never did any of that. Provide proof, or no one is going to believe you.

he's no leftist of mine

Leftist of yours? Weird, I didn't know you owned leftism.

[cratehorus]

lol you didn't know I own leftism? Who did you think owned it silly?

[festive1]

We can't break the two party system and get equal federal funding for all candidates without voting for representatives who would support this. As so few of the American electorate votes, and given what happened in 2000 with Nader, I don't think the two party system will be broken by a third party gaining a high enough percentage of the vote. Because Americans, by and large, don't vote. Not voting = not caring who is elected. If you don't vote, you are throwing away your own voice.

[Tiberius]

Vote and vote third party. Voting is too important, please don't discourage people from exercising their right to vote.

If I could give more than one kudos, I would. The power of the third party needs more awareness in America. The answer isn't to not vote; the answer is to get active and convince people to turn the system around.

[Ryantology]

That sounds great in theory. But, until you can convince many millions of people to do it, voting for a third party is practically the same thing as not voting at all.

We have a system in which we must choose the lesser of the two evils and we have to accept that; it's not going anywhere anytime soon. Nothing in our lifetime is going to change that. America went through a catastrophic civil war, which was a division of party politics almost as much as it was of geography, and even that didn't fix the system. Counting on a spontaneous and thorough overhaul of pretty much the entirety of American politics is not something I would bet on. I'll vote for the party which is closer to representing my interests because there is no hope for any party which claims to encapsulate all, or even most, of them.

The way I look at it, voting for a third party is not voting for the common interest because such a vote has zero practical value in this country. I hate that, I really do, but that is political reality and I accept it because I am in no position to change it by myself and I am not the kind who could sway the minds of tens of millions to my point of view.

Besides, the last time we had a chance for a legitimate third party, we got the Tea Party, and while it is usually in bad taste to compare people you dislike to the Nazis, the best I can say about the Tea Party is that they aren't quite as psychotic. And they would sooner invite gay black muslims over for dinner than adopt the term 'socialism' in their title.

[Autumnlicious]

TL;DR too many fucking idiots in this thread lobbying for a third party when history has demonstrated that it merely dilutes the voting pool such that small changes in swing states only harm similarly aligned political parties.

Y'all had your fucking chances at the Primaries to make your stance. Y'all fucking didn't.

And now you want to screw over all of us because you didn't get your personal choice.

Fuck y'all cocksuckers.

[Polaris]

Obama a better guy? He's a war criminal in violation of the 1949 Geneva War Convention concerning the treatment of civilians during times of war and conflict.

[Autumnlicious]

Better than Romney.

Or would you care to fucking prove otherwise?

Compare platforms, actions and history to each other and tell me, honestly, the Romney is the better choice?

Third parties are a joke in America due to first past the post and advertising causing most political ideologies to unite into two blocs.

[festive1]

Obama a better guy? He's a war criminal in violation of the 1949 Geneva War Convention concerning the treatment of civilians during times of war and conflict.

Again, I'll say, first things first. Try Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, then you can move on to other administrations. To do otherwise is simply hypocritical.

[Polaris]

Obama a better guy? He's a war criminal in violation of the 1949 Geneva War Convention concerning the treatment of civilians during times of war and conflict.

Again, I'll say, first things first. Try Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, then you can move on to other administrations. To do otherwise is simply hypocritical.

To denounce one administration and then turn a blind eye when the next does the same thing is far worse. It's better to try the guy doing it first and then use it as a precedence to nail the others.